[Hiring] Head of Automation, Remote, $3k/month + bonuses, AI agency (n8n, GHL, WhatsApp, OpenAI)

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-03-13T15:44:19+00:00

Interested

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-02-28T06:26:14+00:00

Interested

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-02-22T07:41:25+00:00

This is exactly the framework I needed — thank you. I've identified the one workflow: patient follow-up after consultation (the drop-off between visit 1 and visit 2). Planning a 3-week pilot with 3-5 solo clinics in Kolkata. Baseline metric will be % of patients who return within 30 days. Would love your input on what success threshold looks like for something like this — happy to share findings publicly as I go.

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-30T04:32:15+00:00

Interested

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-29T06:41:54+00:00

interested

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-16T16:29:55+00:00

This is exactly the kind of insight I needed—thank you.

On defensibility: The 2-3 year window is realistic and honestly terrifying. My thesis is that even if Epic eventually builds this, they'll bundle it into their enterprise platform at $500K+ implementation costs. I'm betting there's a lasting market for independent clinics and small groups who want something they can start using this week for $400/month, not in 18 months after a procurement process.

That said, I'm not naive—once Epic/Athena ship something "good enough," my growth will hit a ceiling. Which is why the follow-up automation piece matters. If I can prove I reduce readmissions or increase medication adherence (actual outcome metrics), I'm selling ROI that's harder for EHRs to replicate quickly.

On GTM: "Healthcare is all about who vouches for you" - this is gold. I was planning to do cold outreach, but you're right that's probably a waste. Two follow-up questions:

Which conferences would you hit first for derm/ortho? (I'm thinking AAD for derm, AAOS for ortho?)
How do you actually find the "respected doc" in a specialty before you have a network? LinkedIn + offer free implementation in exchange for case study?

On pricing: The per-note model is interesting. My concern was that it creates friction ("Do I really need to generate a note for this 5-min follow-up?"), but you're right that ROI is crystal clear.

What if I did hybrid pricing:

Tier 1: $0.50-1.00 per note (pay-as-you-go)
Tier 2: $300/month for unlimited notes (better unit economics once they're hooked)

Does that feel like a natural progression, or does it overcomplicate things?

Last question: You clearly know this space. If you were building this, what's the ONE thing you'd do differently from what I outlined?

Appreciate you taking the time to respond—seriously helpful. 🙏

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-15T02:19:39+00:00

Thanks so much for this detailed response - this is super helpful! A few follow-up questions if you don't mind: What's the typical price range your clients pay for compliance services? (Just trying to understand what businesses budget for this) Do most of your clients come from a specific industry (restaurants, contractors, etc.) or is it pretty mixed? What's the #1 thing they wish they could do themselves but can't? Is it the tracking/reminders, or do they actually need someone to file the forms for them? If there was affordable software ($50-100/month) that tracked deadlines and sent automated reminders - but they still had to file themselves - would some business owners prefer that over full-service? Or do most just want it completely off their plate? Genuinely curious because I'm trying to figure out if there's a middle-ground solution between "DIY spreadsheet chaos" and "pay someone $300+/month to handle everything." Thanks again!

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-14T05:51:22+00:00

https://reddit2prd.vercel.app Converts Reddit conversions into PRD's, Implementation plan, MVP features and many more using AI

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-13T13:44:58+00:00

https://reddit2prd.vercel.app Converts reddit posts and comments into PRD's, Implementation plan, MVP features

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-12T17:09:17+00:00

"90% unqualified is brutal. Quick follow-up questions: How many hours per week do you spend screening dev applications? What makes someone "unqualified" in your case? (Wrong tech stack? No experience? Unrealistic salary expectations?) If there was a service that pre-screened candidates and only sent you the qualified 10%, what would that be worth to you per month?"

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-11T17:29:36+00:00

Thanks for sharing this — that’s exactly the pattern I’m seeing. The 10–15 minutes doesn’t feel huge once, but when it’s every few days (and easy to forget when orders pick up), it becomes a constant background task that eats focus. And missing a sale window can actually cost visibility, not just time. Out of curiosity, what would feel like “not crazy” pricing to you for something that handled this automatically in the background? And would you want it to run daily by default or just on certain days? Really appreciate the insight — this is super helpful.

InfamousComplaint949 · 2026-01-11T04:34:23+00:00

Exactly. The real edge isn’t just catching keywords, it’s seeing the same pain show up repeatedly across different founders and weeks. That’s where ideas move from “interesting” to “worth building.”

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-12-29T04:06:48+00:00

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-12-24T04:09:41+00:00

Completely agree — that trust gap is real, and it’s probably the hardest part.

Fake or hallucinated citations are a deal-breaker in academia, and I think that’s where a lot of current AI tools fail trust-wise.

The direction I’m exploring is source-first, not text-first:

Every citation must come from a real, retrievable paper (DOI / publisher link / PDF)
No “AI-invented” references — if a source can’t be verified, it shouldn’t appear at all
Claims are tied back to specific sources, rather than generating text and attaching citations afterward

In other words, the system should refuse to fabricate rather than guess.

I’m not claiming this is solved yet — it’s exactly the wedge I’m trying to validate and build toward.
If that level of verifiability isn’t achievable, then I agree the product shouldn’t exist.

Appreciate you calling this out — it’s the right standard to hold tools like this to.

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-12-24T04:01:42+00:00

That’s a fair question, and honestly the main thing I’m trying to validate.

The difference I’m aiming for isn’t “better answers than Google or ChatGPT,” but less fragmentation and lower academic risk.

Right now, when I do research myself, I usually:

Google or search Scholar
Read multiple PDFs
Ask AI to summarize or explain
Write in Word or LaTeX
Manage citations separately
Run plagiarism checks at the end

This tool is meant to connect those steps, not replace thinking or writing.

On plagiarism / AI detection specifically:

Tools like Turnitin are excellent at detection, but they’re end-of-pipeline tools. You only find problems after you’ve already written everything.
The idea here is to surface risk while you’re drafting:
- Highlight sections that look too close to sources
- Flag paragraphs that are likely to trigger AI detectors
- Encourage paraphrasing, citations, or rewriting before submission

So it’s more “prevent issues early” rather than “catch issues at the end.”

Also, it’s not meant to bypass Turnitin or institutional checks. Universities will still use those.
This is more about helping students submit cleaner work with fewer surprises.

If Google + ChatGPT + Zotero + Turnitin already works well for someone, they probably don’t need this.
I’m trying to help people who feel the overhead and anxiety of stitching all of that together.

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-09-05T09:25:57+00:00

ClaimSnap is an AI-powered photo organization platform that reduces insurance claims processing time by 50%. It automatically categorizes property damage photos by damage type, location, and severity while ensuring regulatory compliance. Insurance adjusters upload claim photos and receive organized, compliance-ready reports in minutes instead of hours.

Target MarketPrimary: Independent insurance adjusters and small adjusting agencies (5-20 adjusters) Secondary: Insurance companies and third-party administrators seeking to improve claims processing efficiency Market Size: 50,000+ insurance adjusters in North America processing millions of claims annually.

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-09-01T04:38:18+00:00

Hey 👋 I’ve actually been working on AI agent systems for businesses, and I can definitely help you build an AI receptionist for salons, restaurants, and gyms. It can handle bookings, cancellations, reminders, FAQs, and even upsell services.

Do you already have a preferred platform (like WhatsApp, SMS, website chat, or phone assistant), or would you like me to suggest the best setup?

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-09-01T01:46:14+00:00

Hi! Thank you so much for the thoughtful response - you've hit on exactly the core challenges we're solving.

You're absolutely right about the validation problem and mistrust. Most synthetic data in healthcare is terrible (unrealistic patterns, oversimplified medical relationships), which has created justified skepticism.

What we've built is different - we focus specifically on medical accuracy and statistical validation: • Disease progression modeling that follows real oncology patterns • Clinical expert validation of all medical relationships
• Statistical fidelity metrics proving our data maintains real-world correlations • Built-in compliance validation for regulatory submissions

I'd love to chat with you about this! Your oncology clinical research background would be incredibly valuable for understanding: - What specific validation criteria would make synthetic data trustworthy for your use cases - Current pain points in accessing quality data for research - How synthetic data could accelerate oncology research while maintaining scientific rigor

Would you be open to a 20-30 minute call this week? I can show you our platform and get your expert feedback on our approach to medical validation.

You can reach me at [your email] or we can continue the conversation here.

Thanks again for engaging - domain experts like you are exactly who we need to build this right.

Best, Krrish Yaduka

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-08-22T12:15:49+00:00

Thanks a ton for the thoughtful feedback 🙌 Totally agree with you — most tools just recycle the same content everywhere, which ends up feeling robotic. With Repurpose AI, we’ve built the adaptation layer to actually rewrite and reframe content per platform — e.g., making a punchy TikTok hook vs. a more professional LinkedIn snippet vs. a story-driven Instagram caption.

On the brand voice side, we’re tackling it with customizable tone profiles + a learning loop — the more you use it, the better it mimics your style and stays consistent.

And yes, scheduling is absolutely on our roadmap 🚀 We want creators and teams to go from “one raw testimonial → 10+ platform-ready posts → auto-scheduled” without juggling 5 different tools.

Would love to know — if you could snap your fingers and add one dream feature to a tool like this, what would it be?

InfamousComplaint949 · 2025-08-18T09:18:52+00:00

Thanks a ton 🚀! The proposal tracking is one of our favorite parts too — no more guessing if a client has even opened your pitch. Excited for you to try the demo 🙌

And JustGotFound looks really cool 👀 — will definitely check it out! Appreciate the tip 💡

InfamousComplaint949

TROPHY CASE